Law on Internet to prosecute rumormongers unconstitutional

By Park Si-soo

A law that provided the legal grounds to indict “Minerva,” a well-known Internet commentator, for spreading “misleading” information on the Internet was ruled unconstitutional, Tuesday.

The Constitutional Court’s ruling immediately brought an end to the 49-year-old law, which opposition legislators claimed had been abused to gag anti-government bloggers amid concerns about the growing influence of the Internet in this extensively wired country.

Clause 1 of Article 47 of the Electricity Telecommunications Act states that a person can face up to five years in prison or a 50 million won fine for spreading misleading information with the intention of harming “the public interest” via the telecommunications infrastructure, including the Internet.

But the court said the term “public interest” was so unclear that it failed to meet the constitutional requirement of a clear definition for those breaking the law.

“The term ‘public interest’ is unclear and abstract,” said Lee Kang-kook, president of the nation’s highest court. “The definition can be varied when it comes to behavior punishable as a violation of the law. I don’t think there is a commonly acknowledged definition of the term even among legal experts.”

Two people filed petitions against the law with the court in December 2008 and May 2009, respectively. The latter was Park Dae-sung, an economic commentator on the Internet known throughout South Korea by the online pen name of Minerva — after the Roman goddess of wisdom.

The 32-year-old Park gained an almost prophet-like status in 2008 after he correctly predicted a series of dismal events on the global financial market, including the crash of the South Korean currency.

After the high-profile ruling by the court, Park told reporters that: “For us who live in the 21st century, the Electricity Telecommunications Act is an outdated law that infringes upon individual human rights. This kind of law cannot exist any longer.”

Park said he realized the importance of the freedom of expression while he was going through a trial that lasted two years.

“There should be no such thing as the suppression of freedom of expression by the nation or government,” he said.

Park was arrested in January last year for two articles he posted on the nation’s second largest web portal; in one, he claimed the government issued an “emergency order” to financial firms and major corporations to stop buying U.S. dollars in an effort to arrest the fall of the Korean currency.

The government refuted his articles as groundless, viewing his postings as an act intended to harm “the public interest.”

Park filed the petition when his trial remained unconcluded at a district court. He was acquitted in April last year and the prosecution has appealed the ruling.

His case, now pending at an appellate court, will be dropped in accordance with the ruling, court officials said.

The case sparked lengthy debate about how much freedom of expression should be tolerated in cyberspace in a country so extensively wired.

The Ministry of Justice said the ruling was regrettable, citing an ongoing investigation into Internet rumors regarding North Korea’s attack on a South Korean warship in March and Yeonpyeong Island last month ㅡ more than 28 bloggers have been indicted for spreading groundless rumors regarding the two incidents.

In July last year, the National Human Rights Commission demanded the court rule the case unconstitutional

The commission said the law was so vague that it was difficult for law enforcement authorities to judge whom should be subject to it. Similar laws in other countries have either been struck down or are ignored.

According to the commission, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that a law that punishes an activist for distributing leaflets containing what Canadian prosecutors called “groundless” rumors on the holocaust during World War II was unconstitutional. The Canadian court said groundless news should still be protected under the freedom of expression.

인터넷 루머 유포자 처벌 조항 헌법 위배

허위 사실을 유포했다는 이유로 유명한 인터넷 논객 ‘미네르바’를 기소한 법 조항이 화요일 위헌 판결을 받았다.

전기통신법 47조 1항은 인터넷을 포함한 전기통신설비로 공익을 해치는 허위 사실을 유포한 이에게 5 년 이하의 징역이나 5천만 원 이하의 벌금에 처한다고 되어있다.

그러나 헌재는 “공익”의 의미가 불명확하기에 객관적 의미를 정하기 어려워 헌법상 명확성의 원칙에 위배된다고 전했다.

온라인상 미네르바로 잘 알려진 인터넷 경제 논객 박대성씨 (32)는 2008년 한국의 외환 위기 등 세계 금융 시장에 불어 닥친 위기를 정확히 예측한 뒤 경제 예언가로 칭송 받았다.

세간의 이목을 집중시킨 판결 후, 박씨는 지난 2년의 재판 과정에서 표현 자유의 중요성을 깨달았다고 했다.

박씨는 지난해 1월 국내에서 두 번째로 큰 포털 사이트에 두 개의 글을 올렸다. 그 중 하나에 정부의 외환 보유고가 고갈돼 외환 예산 환전 업무를 중단 했다고 주장했다.

정부는 근거 없는 박씨의 글에 반박하며, 공익을 해쳤다고 고소했다.

이 사건은 인터넷이 발달된 나라에서 표현의 자유가 어느 정도 허용 되는 가를 두고 열띤 토론을 일으켰다.